Who Has A Right To Crimea

byVolodymyr G. Butkevych

How did the present Crimean question arise?

At the end of the summer of 1917, the Ukrainian Rada sent
a delegation to Petrograd to discuss questions of autonomy
with the Provisional Government. The latter appointed a commission
of scholars to join the discussions. The Ukrainian delegation
enunciated a position supporting the inclusion of the Crimean
Peninsula into Ukrainian territory. As a member of the delegation,
Vynnychenko described the reaction of the Russian scholars to
this suggestion:

"Caught up in the heat of the debates, the
Kadet scholars unconsciously allowed their true, full, miserly
bourgeois class face to surface. Measuring out the territory of
the future autonomous Ukraine, they touched on the questions of
the Black Sea, Odessa, the Donetsk region, Katerynoslav, Kherson
and Kharkiv. Here, with the sole thought in mind of Donetsk and
Kherson coal, Katerynoslav steel, Kharkiv industry will remain
theirs, they became so agitated that they forgot their professional
behaviour, their knowledge, the Constituent Assembly, and began
frantically waving their arms, showing the real essence of their
slick, miserly Russian nationalism. Oh no, under these conditions
they could not accept (Ukrainian) autonomy. Kyiv, Poltava, Podillia,
even Volyn' and maybe even Chernihiv. But Odessa and the Black Sea,
with its port and a route to the Dardanelles and Europe? But Kharkiv,
Tauriia, Katerynoslav and Kherson? The population in these parts is
not Ukrainian; they are Russian territories, they say. The poor
professors even spit in the face of their knowledge and like an
unweaned piglet, they kicked their legs out when approached with
their own statistics and evidence from the Russian Academy of
Sciences." [32]

So as not to increase tensions, the Rada decided to proclaim
its jurisdiction only over undisputed territories. Regarding others
such as Crimea, that were creating points of contention, it decided
to forego discussion for separate talks. With these considerations
in mind, the authors of the Third Universal 33 proclaimed in that
document:

"Belonging to the territory of the Ukrainian
National Republic are the lands, populated mainly by Ukrainians,
including: Kyiv, Podillia, Volyn', Chernihiv, Poltava, Kharkiv,
Katerynoslav, Kherson, Tauriia (without Crimea). The final
demarcation of the national borders of the Ukrainian National
Republic regarding the inclusion of Kursk, Kholm, Voronezh,
and the guberniias between these lands, where the population
is mainly Ukrainian, must be established under the agreement
of the organised will of the people."

Having forgotten the latter condition (perhaps due to the
fact that the Rada was preparing to discuss the question directly
with Crimea and not with Russia), the Russian Sovnarkom insisted
in their discussions with the Germans that the territories under
consideration in their talks should include only those named in
the Third Universal. On March 29, 1918, the German Foreign Ministry
replied to a memorandum received from the Russian People's
Commissariat for Foreign Affairs on March 26:

"The final establishment of borders between
Russia and Ukraine must receive attention in a Russo-Ukrainian
treaty of peace, which the Russian Government is obligated to
conclude immediately according to the peace treaty it concluded
with us and our allies. The German Imperial Government, in
accordance with the proclamation of the Ukrainian Central Rada,
maintains that the following nine guberniias belong to Ukraine:
Volyn, Podillia, Kherson, Tauriia (without Crimea), Kyiv, Poltava,
Chernihiv, Katerynoslav and Kharkiv. It would also be worth adding
sections of the Kholm guberniia, that have been imparted to Ukraine
in adherence to treaties concluded by our allies with it. "
[34]

The note, while not part of the Brest-Litovsk Treaty, touches
on a final settling of the territorial question between Russia
and Ukraine. The Rada continued to insist on a final regulation
of the territorial problem. Russia, on the other hand, had at
this time sent its own emissaries to attempt to convince Crimea
to separate from Ukraine.

Having no significant cadres from which to gain support (while
financially supported by Petrograd to the sum of 49 million rubles),
the emissaries formed a Central Committee of local Soviets in Tauriia
and on 19 March 1918, proclaimed a Soviet Socialist Tauride Republic.
The new leadership claimed its jurisdiction over Ukrainian territory
as well. The Russian Sovnarkom quickly announced the establishment of
official relations with the new 'republic'. Three days later the
Tauride government corrected its earlier mistake by renouncing its
claims to the Dnipro, Melitopil and Berdians'k regions of Ukraine.
According to the 1897 census, the population of the Dnipro region
was 73% Ukrainian, while that of the Melitopil and Berdians'k regions
was 59% and 54% respectively.

The Tauride Republic lasted for one month and was dissolved by the
Tatars on 30 April 1918. The Russian Sovnarkom realised by then that
it had erred in pursuing the separation of Tauriia from Ukraine. The
Tauride government had no support from the local population and was,
therefore, doomed from the start. The logical course would have been
to allow the people to decide for themselves; but the Sovnarkom knew
that the people would not decide in Russia's favour. Thus, it decided
to convince the local population that it was being represented by its
own and changed the identities of the emissaries to make them appear
Ukrainian. S. Ordzhonikidze wrote to Lenin on 14 March 1918 that it
was necessary to "immediately create a unified defensive front from
Crimea to Great Russia, engage our villagers and decisively and
unconditionally change our face in Ukraine. This is our immediate
task. Antonov must be prohibited from using the name Antonov-Ovsienko,
and must only use Ovsienko. The same can be said of Muravyov (if he
remains in his position) and others.

"Please tell comrades Vasylchenko, Zhakov and
others that no matter how they plot to separate their region from
Ukraine, it will, judging from Vynnychenko's geography, be included
into Ukraine and the Germans will fight for it."
[35]

A chief of the Austrian Foreign Ministry Headquarters wrote:

"The road to the East is through Kyiv, Ekaterynoslav
and Sevastopil, since this is where ties to Batumi and Trapesund
begin. In my opinion Germany intends to leave Crimea behind as its
colony in one form or another. They will never let the rich Crimean
Peninsula slip out of their hands." [36]

The Germans indeed did capture Crimea in the Spring of 1918. The
note of a German diplomatic representative to the RSFSR, Mirbach,
indicates that on 3 May 1918 the Russian Commissariat of Foreign
Affairs was informed that "the Imperial Government will bestow full
right to the self-determination proclaimed by the Russian government,
and foresees that the question of Crimea, which until the present
belonged to the Tauride guberniia, will become the subject of a
Russo-Ukrainian treaty." [37]

At a meeting of representatives from the Imperial Government
and Kaiser Wilhelm lI's Supreme Central Command it was also stated
that "Great Russia and Ukraine are presently each laying claims to
Crimea. Agreement between the two on this question is as impossible
as on the question of borders. Order, in the most extreme case,
must be imposed. Bolshevik criminals are still roaming free there.
We cannot do justice indirectly. The population is not able to form
a government. General Sul'kevych is ready to rule the country in
conjunction with us." [38]

General Sul'kevych formed a Crimean government on 17 June 1918.
Like his predecessors he was unfamiliar with the conditions present
in Crimea and regardless of his ethnic ties to the local population
(he was a Lithuanian Tatar), Sul'kevych found support from the people
of Crimea. He was able to install himself in power only with the help
of a handful of Tatars when he appealed to the German government for
help in transforming Crimea into an independent Tatar Khanate. This
appeal was received by Germany on 21 July 1918. However, the population
of Crimea openly supported and pursued a renewal of political, economic
and socio-cultural ties with Ukraine.

Railworkers in Ukraine and Crimea organised a strike in July 1918.
The Russian press increasingly began writing of the people of Crimea
as peasants of southern Ukraine. A plenary meeting of the UKP(b)
Central Committee on 8 September 1918 issued an order to the Odessa
party obkom: "Tour Crimea, help organise a Crimean Conference, and
give every encouragement to our Crimean comrades, including financial
aid." [39] According to an order of the RKP(b)
Central Committee from October 1918, the Crimean party organisation
was made a part of the Ukrainian party structure as a provincial party.
Thus delegates from Crimea were present at the UKP(b) Second Congress
WhiCh took place from 17-22 October 1918.

There were also connections to organs of Soviet power in Ukraine.
For example, the Ukrainian Sovnarkom invited Crimean representatives
to a meeting of Ukrainian provincial government leaders in March 1918.
These contacts continued even during the period of German occupation.
Furthermore, the inability of the pro-German Sul'kevych government to
foil attempts at renewing Crimean-Ukrainian ties became greater and
greater.

Following the liberation of Crimea from German occupation, on 14-15
November a Russian Kadet/SRlMenshevik/ government was formed. However,
this government lasted only a very short time.

Local Links:

About The Author

Volodymyr G. Butkevych, a Ph.D. in juridical studies,
currently heads the Ukrainian Institute of International
Relations' Department of International Law. He is also
the Vice-President of the (former Soviet) International
Law Association. His studies have focused on the protection
of human rights in the USSR and in Ukraine, as well as on
the chasm between Soviet legal standards and international
norms. In addition, Butkevych is the Chairman of the
International Human Rights Conference's Organisational
Committee. The Conference is held annually in Kyiv.

About the Editor

Eugene S. Kachmarsky, an M.A. in political science
specialising in eastern Europe and the former USSR, is
a graduate of the University of Toronto. He is currently
the editor of the English-language monthly newspaper,
Ukrainian Echo.